My Dad was able to bring home his work's camera, it's a Olympus D-560. It's a vast improvement over my old 1mp but it's not the best. When I went to take a picture without the flash on things go really blurry. The Rainbow's without flash and the Ram's with.

Awesome pics by the way. I still say, the number of [ixels determines the size of the photo more than anything, the quality of the ccd will determine how good the picture is. If you have the largest amount of photosites on the ccd, but the ccd quality is not the best, the larger picture will simply amplify the imperfections.

Brenden, the reason for the blur without the flash, is that the shutterspeed was slowed by the camera to allow enough light for a decent exposure. With fast fish, it is almost impossible to get away from using the flash

At 1/2500 shutterspeed the image will be very crisp and black if you don't use a flash. The shutter speed controls how long the shutter is open 1/2500 does not allow much time for light to reach the sensor.

Its definitely not necessary for taking pics of fish I can take super crisp pics of my Tropheus (which are constantly moving at lightning speed ) with a shutter speed under 1/200s. I used to take pics of them with a 1/2000s shutter speed (with a flash), but found it was giving me a longer shutter lag, and wasnt necessary. I went down lower and lower and found that I can stop a fast fish in his tracks with 1/160s without any problems.

This is silly. You aren't going to be able to see any difference between a 1MP and a 6MP by looking at nice pictures on this website. You'll see good photography and bad photography, but you're unlikely to be able to see the value of more pixels.

Check the resolution of the monitor that you are all viewing pictures with. I bet you'll find it has less than 2 million pixels in the entire screen area. That means if you are looking at any image that has more than 2 million pixels, you're not seeing all the detail that the image may have...especially if the image isn't using the full screen.

The proof is in the print.

By the time you're looking at the image on this site, it doesn't have the original number of pixels anyway. It's been compressed and lost information in order to be posted.

Post up a 1MP pic at 1024x768 and one of a 8MP at the same size and youll notice a HUGE difference. We are limited to our screen resolution, but there is still a HUGE difference between a 1MP and 8MP shown here our monitors.

Post up a 1MP pic at 1024x768 and one of a 8MP at the same size and youll notice a HUGE difference. We are limited to our screen resolution, but there is still a HUGE difference between a 1MP and 8MP shown here our monitors.

Hmm, don't have a 1 MP camera, but I got one that will take pics at 2 MP on up to 12 MP. If I'm not mistaken the resolution of a 1 MP camera will be 1024 X 768. Since there aren't too many 1MP cams floating around, I thought it might be more fair to do it from 2 MP up.